Re: volunteer to draft next update release - Mailing list pgsql-advocacy

Hi Everyone,

On Oct 20, 2016, at 10:50 AM, Umair Shahid <umair.shahid@gmail.com> wrote:

On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 8:47 PM, Jonathan S. Katz <jkatz@postgresql.org> wrote:

On Oct 19, 2016, at 11:13 AM, Jonathan S. Katz <jkatz@postgresql.org> wrote:

On Oct 19, 2016, at 11:12 AM, Umair Shahid <umair.shahid@gmail.com> wrote:

On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 8:09 PM, Jonathan S. Katz <jkatz@postgresql.org> wrote:

> On Oct 18, 2016, at 6:35 PM, Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com> wrote:
>
> On 10/18/2016 02:50 PM, Jonathan S. Katz wrote:
>
>>> Oh, also: 9.1 is EOL as of this release.
>>>
>>> There are several big fixes in this release, including a data-corruption
>>> one for 9.6.
>>
>> Sounds like it will be a fun writeup.  Looking forward to getting the
>> specific feature list.
>
> Well, whoever is going to be doing this should be going out on hackers
> now and figuring out what the big fixes are.  That's frankly most of the
> work -- well, that and the list of minor fixes, which will come on its
> own on Monday.

Per Tom on the -hackers thread, he advised waiting for the release notes.  Heikki identified the two major things.

Would you recommended drafting the notes in the wiki or in the “press” repo or put it in a thread?

FYI, I have added a template named update_201610.md under the /update_releases/current in the press repo. 

Found this.  I am going to start filling in details.  Do I have push writes to the repo?

Answer is yes.

Because this is my first time doing this, I want to work on it early and often to get into the proper cadence :-)  I took a try at writing up the data corruption issue as well as adding the EOL language:

https://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=press.git;a=commitdiff;h=38aadd18e9c64f30423f81920381b001fff8b4c5;hp=1ada1db63eaed94e499c1289e90bdf70a47f9fc0

I understand part of the challenge is taking the detailed commit notes and putting it into language that makes sense to the users, which is why I want more eyes on this.  I intend to fill out more details once the rest of the release notes are out, but if there are major issues I find it prudent that we get the language for that correct so users understand the ramifications and the need to upgrade.

I have pushed a few changes. 

I reviewed Tom’s release notes and changed the major issues per how he prioritized them (Umair: I removed your description for the crash issue as that was not prioritized in the release notes).  I also filled out other fixes included in the release as well as the post-release instructions.  I also incorporated Justin’s feedback and removed run-ons.

https://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=press.git;a=blob;f=update_releases/current/update_201610.md;h=f76a5eaaef2a030a8e1c472618a00ff66571f1f3;hb=7cd3c633b13f241db0a258dd9cd6f0aaa436531f

Do you think we should highlight the DISTINCT aggregate crashes?  It seemed it was more important to highlight the potential data corruption vectors.

Per Josh’s timeline, the next step is to send it to -hackers for feedback, but I wanted to share with this group first before doing so.

Thanks,

Jonathan